When did I say they are needed? My argument is that they are not needed, which I thought was apparent by my previous comment.

the whole debate has nothing to do with what is needed and what is not needed, this implies that owning a firearm is a privilege, the fact of the matter is that owning firearms is a right, which is guaranteed, not granted, by the Constitution. Let's say that tomorrow, the government decides to amend the Constitution and nullify the 2nd amendment, they are simply taking away the guarantee of that right to be upheld. the right still exists inherently in all human beings in spite of what anyone says or what any government does.

Modern weaponry such as handguns, shotguns, assault weapons, rifles have only existed in a short snapshot of time. During the rest of human history, people were quite effectively able to kill millions of other people with blade weapons, blunt weapons, non-gun projectile weapons, siege weapons, starvation, poisoning, intentional fires, plague and smallpox blankets, etc. etc. Humans have no lack of creativity in finding ways of mass-killing other humans, regardless of the technology available.

the funny thing is that throughout all of history rulers have tried to ban common people from owning weapons of any kind that pose a threat to the power of that ruler, this was seen in all of the 20th century authoritarian countries, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, China...the British tried it at Lexington and Concord over two hundred years ago, further back, swords were allowed only for the privileged group in society in places like feudal Europe or Japan where an armed serf class would pose a threat to the legitimacy of the rulers.

no matter what the common weaponry is for any era, there will always be people who try to tell others what they can and cannot own, and it has nothing to do with safety.

As a private individual I keep getting "Permission Denied", "Access Denied" when I apply for right to acquire certain missile launchers. Neighborhood Watch and Zoning are a royal PIA too. No one believes that all I want to do is seed the upper stratosphere with "I Like Ike" pamphlets.

the funny thing is that throughout all of history rulers have tried to ban common people from owning weapons of any kind that pose a threat to the power of that ruler, this was seen in all of the 20th century authoritarian countries, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, China...the British tried it at Lexington and Concord over two hundred years ago, further back, swords were allowed only for the privileged group in society in places like feudal Europe or Japan where an armed serf class would pose a threat to the legitimacy of the rulers.

no matter what the common weaponry is for any era, there will always be people who try to tell others what they can and cannot own, and it has nothing to do with safety.

That's very true - it's much harder to have an insurrection, rebellion, or coup d'etat if you don't have the modern weapons of that era. And that just makes it easier for the people in power to keep people under control if they have a monopoly on weapons.

Funny thing is, America would literally be the hardest country for any invading army to conquer and subdue. Disregarding the fact that the US is buffered by the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and the amount of land that would need to be controlled, many American civilians own guns, so they would be able to conduct militia-style guerrilla warfare on any army landing on American soil. As a matter of fact, the Japanese during WWII had considered invading and taking over key tactical areas on the West Coast of the American mainland, but a general (I believe Yamamoto) was convinced it would be a foolish campaign since American civilians with guns would add an extra disadvantage against the Japanese invading force.

I have six katanas, real ones not replicas and they were not cheap. I also took a few years of kenjutsu, so if you break into my house you're gonna lose a limb. I also have various knives and many pairs of nunchucks which I also know how to use. I just don't trust myself with a gun. I would have shot every game console and every PC I've ever owned. I absolutely know I would have....

Why do you need a semi-automatic for a shooting competition or for hunting?

First of all, almost all shooting competitions involve semi-automatic weapons. And as for hunting, its nice having more than just a single round to fire, in case you miss your first shot.

Can't you have a competition with a bolt action rifle too? Why do you need a semi-automatic?

Just because it is fun to shoot multiple bullets at a time doesn't mean you have to do it. It sounds like there is no reason why you should have to use a semi-automatic for recreational purposes, all of those competitions should be replaced with bolt action competitions.

I like idea of bow and arrows. Takes skill to use one to hit a moving target, unlike the punks squeezing a trigger and spraying at innocent people.

So... Are you're saying it doesn't take skill to shoot a firearm?

Correct any idiot can squeeze a trigger and cause harm to innocent people. Especially untrained people with mentality issues.

Just because crazy people shoot innocent people doesn't mean it doesn't take skill to be a marksman. It's pretty easy to miss something you're shooting at while standing right in front of it. I've seen many people do it many times. It doesn't take skill to shoot a firearm or a bow, but it takes skill to shoot both of them properly and accurately.

You are talking about semi automatic weapons vs a bow and arrow. Noone public needs the use of automatic weaponry. Military and law enforcement should be the only ones with such weapons. And to be honest if we had no weapons in the world we would be far better off. It takes less to kill or harm someone with a semi-automatic or even full auto gun vs a bow and arrow...stop trolling and get educated. I guess what you are telling me is something like an AR-15 does same amount of damage as a bow and arrow? I guess as long as america has gun nuts with desire for military grade weapons noone will ever be safe within our own borders.

Also marksman gun users normally use high powered sniper rifles as they only need 1 shot.

You are talking about semi automatic weapons vs a bow and arrow. Noone public needs the use of automatic weaponry. Military and law enforcement should be the only ones with such weapons.

Youre right, at this moment in time, no civilian needs automatic weaponry. Civilians choose to own them and in my opinion, every civilian should be able to if they choose to and if they meet the requirements to lawfully own one.

And to be honest if we had no weapons in the world we would be far better off.

You think so huh? Well first, define "weapon" because there are a lot of different things that can be used as a weapon. If youre referring to guns, ill have you know that there was a time where guns didnt exist and guess what? People still went to war and there was still violent crime.

It takes less to kill or harm someone with a semi-automatic or even full auto gun vs a bow and arrow...

Just because a firearm has more power behind it than a bow and arrow, it doesn't mean it doesn't take skill to accurately wield one. You said yourself that marksmen use high powered sniper rifles, meaning they are more powerful than a pistol or carbine. Using your logic, it should be even easier to shoot a sniper rifle, right? Just point and shoot?

I guess what you are telling me is something like an AR-15 does same amount of damage as a bow and arrow

You guessed wrong. I never said that a rifle does as much damage as a bow, but I am saying that they both take some degree of skill to be accurate with. Also, they both can be lethal no matter which is more powerful. Its all about preference.

I guess as long as America has gun nuts with desire for military grade weapons noone will ever be safe within our own borders.

Just because you dont agree with my opinion, doesnt mean that I am "trolling" and if you dont like when people respond to something you say on a public forum either ignore it or dont bother to make a statement. Youre old enough to know that. As far as being educated goes, you should take your own advice, sir.

Opinions are one thing, but consistent trolling and and slightly changing your stance on the topic makes you seem like a bad troll. I can respect opinions but sure seems you are flaming this board. And as far as education goes I know abbreviated words have apostrophes, lol.

AsuraCryin1980
You are talking about semi automatic weapons vs a bow and arrow. Noone public needs the use of automatic weaponry. Military and law enforcement should be the only ones with such weapons. And to be honest if we had no weapons in the world we would be far better off. It takes less to kill or harm someone with a semi-automatic or even full auto gun vs a bow and arrow...stop trolling and get educated. I guess what you are telling me is something like an AR-15 does same amount of damage as a bow and arrow? I guess as long as america has gun nuts with desire for military grade weapons noone will ever be safe within our own borders.

Also marksman gun users normally use high powered sniper rifles as they only need 1 shot.

I'm assuming you say only police/military should have them because they are "trained" how to use them, the reality is that most people who like to shoot get a lot more training than the average police officer or military member.

I think you would also be surprised at how little training police and military (with the exception of Special Forces and SWAT) actually get with firearms...we are talking about maybe 100 rounds down range a year..much more than that and they are doing the shooting on their own time and money, just like the rest of us. I, for example shoot 300 rounds a month and there are other ordinary citizens who shoot a lot more than I do

the idea that a person in a uniform is going to be any more responsible with a firearm than a normal person, or even at life in general is laughable...people are people no matter what profession they are in...this is precisely the kind of infatuation towards authority figures that I cant even begin to relate to; as if they magically turn into gods when they put on the the sacred garb of the state.

It's more about not having every nut job with a short fuse owning automatic weaponry. I'd prefer that none of these weapons exist, but if anyone should have them they should be fully trained and have constant mental evaluations. And by evaluations I mean anytime they have to shoot or think they need to shoot at someone or something. Gun ownership is no different then car owner ship, they are both privileges, both can be used for weapons or defense. As we see everyday both are misused and neglected in untrained hands. Problem is many flame this topic because it is in the spotlight it is a tough topic since it is a constitutional right to bear arms. However many people think street civilians without training and psych evaluations should have automatic military grade weaponry. We have too many street punks with illegal weapons as it is doing drivebys and murders, adding more automatic guns to the solution doesn't make us any more safe.

Why do you need a semi-automatic for a shooting competition or for hunting?

First of all, almost all shooting competitions involve semi-automatic weapons. And as for hunting, its nice having more than just a single round to fire, in case you miss your first shot.

Can't you have a competition with a bolt action rifle too? Why do you need a semi-automatic?

Just because it is fun to shoot multiple bullets at a time doesn't mean you have to do it. It sounds like there is no reason why you should have to use a semi-automatic for recreational purposes, all of those competitions should be replaced with bolt action competitions.

I like idea of bow and arrows. Takes skill to use one to hit a moving target, unlike the punks squeezing a trigger and spraying at innocent people.

So... Are you're saying it doesn't take skill to shoot a firearm?

Correct any idiot can squeeze a trigger and cause harm to innocent people. Especially untrained people with mentality issues.

Just because crazy people shoot innocent people doesn't mean it doesn't take skill to be a marksman. It's pretty easy to miss something you're shooting at while standing right in front of it. I've seen many people do it many times. It doesn't take skill to shoot a firearm or a bow, but it takes skill to shoot both of them properly and accurately.

You are talking about semi automatic weapons vs a bow and arrow. Noone public needs the use of automatic weaponry. Military and law enforcement should be the only ones with such weapons. And to be honest if we had no weapons in the world we would be far better off. It takes less to kill or harm someone with a semi-automatic or even full auto gun vs a bow and arrow...stop trolling and get educated. I guess what you are telling me is something like an AR-15 does same amount of damage as a bow and arrow? I guess as long as america has gun nuts with desire for military grade weapons noone will ever be safe within our own borders.

Also marksman gun users normally use high powered sniper rifles as they only need 1 shot.

You are talking about semi automatic weapons vs a bow and arrow. Noone public needs the use of automatic weaponry. Military and law enforcement should be the only ones with such weapons.

Youre right, at this moment in time, no civilian needs automatic weaponry. Civilians choose to own them and in my opinion, every civilian should be able to if they choose to and if they meet the requirements to lawfully own one.

And to be honest if we had no weapons in the world we would be far better off.

You think so huh? Well first, define "weapon" because there are a lot of different things that can be used as a weapon. If youre referring to guns, ill have you know that there was a time where guns didnt exist and guess what? People still went to war and there was still violent crime.

It takes less to kill or harm someone with a semi-automatic or even full auto gun vs a bow and arrow...

Just because a firearm has more power behind it than a bow and arrow, it doesn't mean it doesn't take skill to accurately wield one. You said yourself that marksmen use high powered sniper rifles, meaning they are more powerful than a pistol or carbine. Using your logic, it should be even easier to shoot a sniper rifle, right? Just point and shoot?

I guess what you are telling me is something like an AR-15 does same amount of damage as a bow and arrow

You guessed wrong. I never said that a rifle does as much damage as a bow, but I am saying that they both take some degree of skill to be accurate with. Also, they both can be lethal no matter which is more powerful. Its all about preference.

I guess as long as America has gun nuts with desire for military grade weapons noone will ever be safe within our own borders.

Just because you dont agree with my opinion, doesnt mean that I am "trolling" and if you dont like when people respond to something you say on a public forum either ignore it or dont bother to make a statement. Youre old enough to know that. As far as being educated goes, you should take your own advice, sir.

Opinions are one thing, but consistent trolling and and slightly changing your stance on the topic makes you seem like a bad troll. I can respect opinions but sure seems you are flaming this board. And as far as education goes I know abbreviated words have apostrophes, lol.

When did I ever change my stance in any degree? Also, youre nitpicking at my use of punctuation but then youre calling me a troll? Lets be serious right now...

AsuraCryin1980
You are talking about semi automatic weapons vs a bow and arrow. Noone public needs the use of automatic weaponry. Military and law enforcement should be the only ones with such weapons. And to be honest if we had no weapons in the world we would be far better off. It takes less to kill or harm someone with a semi-automatic or even full auto gun vs a bow and arrow...stop trolling and get educated. I guess what you are telling me is something like an AR-15 does same amount of damage as a bow and arrow? I guess as long as america has gun nuts with desire for military grade weapons noone will ever be safe within our own borders.

Also marksman gun users normally use high powered sniper rifles as they only need 1 shot.

I'm assuming you say only police/military should have them because they are "trained" how to use them, the reality is that most people who like to shoot get a lot more training than the average police officer or military member.

I think you would also be surprised at how little training police and military (with the exception of Special Forces and SWAT) actually get with firearms...we are talking about maybe 100 rounds down range a year..much more than that and they are doing the shooting on their own time and money, just like the rest of us. I, for example shoot 300 rounds a month and there are other ordinary citizens who shoot a lot more than I do

the idea that a person in a uniform is going to be any more responsible with a firearm than a normal person, or even at life in general is laughable...people are people no matter what profession they are in...this is precisely the kind of infatuation towards authority figures that I cant even begin to relate to; as if they magically turn into gods when they put on the the sacred garb of the state.

It's more about not having every nut job with a short fuse owning automatic weaponry. I'd prefer that none of these weapons exist, but if anyone should have them they should be fully trained and have constant mental evaluations. And by evaluations I mean anytime they have to shoot or think they need to shoot at someone or something. Gun ownership is no different then car owner ship, they are both privileges, both can be used for weapons or defense. As we see everyday both are misused and neglected in untrained hands. Problem is many flame this topic because it is in the spotlight it is a tough topic since it is a constitutional right to bear arms. However many people think street civilians without training and psych evaluations should have automatic military grade weaponry. We have too many street punks with illegal weapons as it is doing drivebys and murders, adding more automatic guns to the solution doesn't make us any more safe.

When you say "automatic weaponry" I hope you're referring to semi-auto and not fully auto.

AsuraCryin1980
You are talking about semi automatic weapons vs a bow and arrow. Noone public needs the use of automatic weaponry. Military and law enforcement should be the only ones with such weapons. And to be honest if we had no weapons in the world we would be far better off. It takes less to kill or harm someone with a semi-automatic or even full auto gun vs a bow and arrow...stop trolling and get educated. I guess what you are telling me is something like an AR-15 does same amount of damage as a bow and arrow? I guess as long as america has gun nuts with desire for military grade weapons noone will ever be safe within our own borders.

Also marksman gun users normally use high powered sniper rifles as they only need 1 shot.

I'm assuming you say only police/military should have them because they are "trained" how to use them, the reality is that most people who like to shoot get a lot more training than the average police officer or military member.

I think you would also be surprised at how little training police and military (with the exception of Special Forces and SWAT) actually get with firearms...we are talking about maybe 100 rounds down range a year..much more than that and they are doing the shooting on their own time and money, just like the rest of us. I, for example shoot 300 rounds a month and there are other ordinary citizens who shoot a lot more than I do

the idea that a person in a uniform is going to be any more responsible with a firearm than a normal person, or even at life in general is laughable...people are people no matter what profession they are in...this is precisely the kind of infatuation towards authority figures that I cant even begin to relate to; as if they magically turn into gods when they put on the the sacred garb of the state.

It's more about not having every nut job with a short fuse owning automatic weaponry. I'd prefer that none of these weapons exist, but if anyone should have them they should be fully trained and have constant mental evaluations. And by evaluations I mean anytime they have to shoot or think they need to shoot at someone or something. Gun ownership is no different then car owner ship, they are both privileges, both can be used for weapons or defense. As we see everyday both are misused and neglected in untrained hands. Problem is many flame this topic because it is in the spotlight it is a tough topic since it is a constitutional right to bear arms. However many people think street civilians without training and psych evaluations should have automatic military grade weaponry. We have too many street punks with illegal weapons as it is doing drivebys and murders, adding more automatic guns to the solution doesn't make us any more safe.

When you say "automatic weaponry" I hope you're referring to semi-auto and not fully auto.

As the family member of an active military person my family and I believe no publice person should have a semi-auto or full auto gun. If you can't do what you want with a single shot you don't need it. We live in the inner city and there are lots of idiot gang bangers running around with semi and full auto weapons. Including innertech 9mm sub machine guns. As a population run and feared on guns we are far safer if noone has any of the above.